This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Do Constructed-Response and Multiple-Choice Questions Measure the Same Thing?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Stephen Hickson () (University of Canterbury)
W. Robert Reed () (University of Canterbury)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Our study empirically investigates the relationship between constructed-response (CR) and multiple-choice (MC) questions using a unique data set compiled from several years of university introductory economics classes. We conclude that CR and MC questions do not measure the same thing. Our main contribution is that we show that CR questions contain independent information that is related to student learning. Specifically, we find that the component of CR scores that cannot be explained by MC responses is positively and significantly related to (i) performance on a subsequent exam in the same economics course, and (ii) academic performance in other courses. Further, we present evidence that CR questions provide information that could not be obtained by expanding the set of MC questions. A final contribution of our study is that we demonstrate that empirical approaches that rely on factor analyses or Walstad-Becker (1994)-type regressions are unreliable in the following sense: It is possible for these empirical procedures to lead to the conclusion that CR and MC questions measure the same thing, even when the underlying data contain strong, contrary evidence. JEL Classifications: A22

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.econ.canterbury.ac.nz/RePEc/cbt/econwp/0908.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by University of Canterbury, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers in Economics with number 09/08.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 35 pages
Date of creation: 01 May 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cbt:econwp:09/08

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand
Phone: 64 3 364 2848 (Administrator)
Fax: 64 3 364 2635
Web page: http://www.econ.canterbury.ac.nz
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Albert Yee).

Related research
Keywords: Principles of Economics Assessment; Multiple Choice; Constructed Response; Free Response; Essay;

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Each page is provided with a technical contact, in case something is not right with the supplied information. See under "publisher info".

This page was last updated on 2009-12-10.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.